As I troll

[HalfEmpty]

I would make a snide comment about one snippet of text too.

I think you would be remiss ifn you didn't. So in the words of the Constant IO

Bring Youz Snippet!

Also, from the Title I was hoping this was a How Too.

[Fantastico]

The matters surrounding this war are fairly simple, but once again the e-lawyers have emerged arguing the semantics of the situation until the essence of the arguments have focused merely on these peripheral issues.

If I could be extremely blunt, you all have a massive vested interest in the outcome of this war, and therefore you lack objectivity. Whilst this is largely always the case in these matters, the specific outcomes of a fully escalated war in this case lend a degree of seriousness to these matters that perhaps drive the arguments to a different level than normal.

My crystal ball shows very few possible outcomes from this war if TPF rallies a coalition to defend its actions. It is therefore prudent for TPF's allies to rinse and repeat their fairly hollow e-lawyering over and over in the hope that someone listens (to date you are not changing anyone's opinions) and for the Athens side of life to repeat their claims over and over in the hope that everyone eventually shuts up and let's it take its course. Which side is right depends only on your ''alliance'' to the cause at hand.

I will suggest strongly to you that the current situation sits firmly at the feet of the alliance that took aggressive action against another, contrary to the standards that we as a community have agreed on, and the outcome is therefore at the discretion of the aggrieved alliance/alliances. To cite the case of FAN, OcUK or even Vox in these matters is redundant. The reaction of one alliance does not validate or invalidate the actions of another. I would cite the Ursarkar Creed/NPO matters involving my alliance, I choose to respond as we did, however I would have been perfectly comfortable going to war as well, but it was a matter for me to decide. My decisions are mine to make when they effect my alliance, just as in these matters Athens and RoK hav decided their course of action.

What now remains to be done is quite simple. If you believe that TPF is being aggrieved, saddle up and ride with the wind towards the battle, saddle up and ride like the wind away from the battle with your infra in your backpack or mindlessly drone on creating as many conflicting threads as possible. I see number 3 being overused in this case, move on to one of the others please, the argument has distilled to two simple positions that can not be argued in circles for much longer.

I can assure you of some simple positions relating to the New Polar Order in these types of situations. If I found a plot to infiltrate my alliance, the decision to respond diplomatically would be mine and mine alone. If I decide that diplomacy is not appropriate then I will roll my tanks as hard and fast as possible and any arguments about attempting diplomacy will be met with firm derision.

Diplomacy is a powerful tool, so is war and both are legitimate options in matters concerning spying. The alliances involved made their decisions, they believe in their causes sufficiently to do so and as such they have the support of their allies. What remains to be seen here is whether the allies of TPF (and their allies allies), believe sufficiently.

I honestly believe this matter will be resolved fairly quickly if confined to the immediate alliances involved. I also believe that the ramifications of wider deployment will ensure a vastly different landscape and not necessarily one that most people will benefit from. Make your decisions wisely because the literal fate of the world is largely in everyone's hands right now.

For complete disclosure, the arguments of OWF have seldom influenced my decision, and in these matters my opinions on the validity of the CB or otherwise will not be tendered by me. It seems fairly simple however to acknowledge there is a dispute, both sides have a version of events, both are probably plausible. Both sides will argue their validity in the matter and at the end of the day there is a still a war. What really matters for everyone is who rolls and where. Choose wisely.

Not to go against the anti-new thread crowd around here, but your post really deserves its own thread.

Your words strike resoundly here, especially as I consider my alliance is one of those that could easily get rigged into either side of this depending how things roll, should this escalate.

Edited December 30, 2009 by Fantastico

[tamerlane]

So, what you are saying is that you are smug and style yourself superior to people on this board? Ah, cool.

I am smug and I am superior to you. I'm glad you understand.

[zzzptm]

Acta non verba, as mhawk said...

Many of TPF's potential allies below 80K NS have entered peace mode, so there won't be any fighting for *them* for at least 5 more days. I think it speaks to the weakness of a cause if there is a mass flight to Peace Mode. Peace Mode is a place for making apologies or preparing "win one for the Gipper!" speeches. For those not familiar with "El Gipper", he was a famous Himynamistan futbol player that passed away while playing for La Universidad de Notre Dame de Zzzptmacan. His coach would inspire the otherwise lackluster team to go win one, "por El Gipper," if his team was down at the half, which was often.

Sometimes, the speech worked. Hence, my reference.

If TPF and its allies were in the right, they would not need to enter Peace Mode, it is that simple. Athens is in the right, and it can stand tall.

[tamerlane]

In retrospect, it is possible to argue this (i.e. if they had done so, they would not be being attacked without diplomacy today). However, as the operation was over when TPF's peace negotiations were finalised (on the 3rd), they had no obligation to do so. Alliances don't send a list of all the spy-ops they've done, leaks of the other side's channels they've seen or sources for those leaks to the victors when they surrender – they just promise not to do any more, which TPF didn't.

I guess that depends on how you view spying. Is it something generally disdained and looked down upon in the community or is it acceptable method of warfare? I tend to err on the side that nobody likes it but Im starting to think I have fewer people in my ring than I originally thought.

Definitely. It's very strange, unless there is an ulterior motive, that ZH still seem to be being protected instead of rolled, as they were just as much a part of the plan as TPF and just as guilty of concealing the plan for nearly 5 months.

I dont think this was an ulterior motive as much as it was Zulchep is a longtime friend of C&G alliances and the fact it came from her and that she fessed up played a major role in forgiveness.

This is true, but I think it's fair to say that TPF had other things to worry about at that time. The fact is, by the time they got peace, the operation was terminated. We can go into what-ifs and statements of intent, but the fact is that after TPF left the Karma War – and surrendered to 'the forces of Karma' – they were no longer running a hostile operation.

Whether or not there were other things to worry about is pretty irrelevant. As for surrendering to the forces of Karma, well nobody will really know what their intentions were so all that is left is giving them the benefit of the doubt.

@ zzzptm:

Not so much a weakness in the cause but genius in the war planning. You don't fool me Moose and Squirrel!

Edited December 31, 2009 by tamerlane

[Goldie]

The matters surrounding this war are fairly simple, but once again the e-lawyers have emerged arguing the semantics of the situation until the essence of the arguments have focused merely on these peripheral issues.

If I could be extremely blunt, you all have a massive vested interest in the outcome of this war, and therefore you lack objectivity. Whilst this is largely always the case in these matters, the specific outcomes of a fully escalated war in this case lend a degree of seriousness to these matters that perhaps drive the arguments to a different level than normal.

My crystal ball shows very few possible outcomes from this war if TPF rallies a coalition to defend its actions. It is therefore prudent for TPF's allies to rinse and repeat their fairly hollow e-lawyering over and over in the hope that someone listens (to date you are not changing anyone's opinions) and for the Athens side of life to repeat their claims over and over in the hope that everyone eventually shuts up and let's it take its course. Which side is right depends only on your ''alliance'' to the cause at hand.

I will suggest strongly to you that the current situation sits firmly at the feet of the alliance that took aggressive action against another, contrary to the standards that we as a community have agreed on, and the outcome is therefore at the discretion of the aggrieved alliance/alliances. To cite the case of FAN, OcUK or even Vox in these matters is redundant. The reaction of one alliance does not validate or invalidate the actions of another. I would cite the Ursarkar Creed/NPO matters involving my alliance, I choose to respond as we did, however I would have been perfectly comfortable going to war as well, but it was a matter for me to decide. My decisions are mine to make when they effect my alliance, just as in these matters Athens and RoK hav decided their course of action.

What now remains to be done is quite simple. If you believe that TPF is being aggrieved, saddle up and ride with the wind towards the battle, saddle up and ride like the wind away from the battle with your infra in your backpack or mindlessly drone on creating as many conflicting threads as possible. I see number 3 being overused in this case, move on to one of the others please, the argument has distilled to two simple positions that can not be argued in circles for much longer.

I can assure you of some simple positions relating to the New Polar Order in these types of situations. If I found a plot to infiltrate my alliance, the decision to respond diplomatically would be mine and mine alone. If I decide that diplomacy is not appropriate then I will roll my tanks as hard and fast as possible and any arguments about attempting diplomacy will be met with firm derision.

Diplomacy is a powerful tool, so is war and both are legitimate options in matters concerning spying. The alliances involved made their decisions, they believe in their causes sufficiently to do so and as such they have the support of their allies. What remains to be seen here is whether the allies of TPF (and their allies allies), believe sufficiently.

I honestly believe this matter will be resolved fairly quickly if confined to the immediate alliances involved. I also believe that the ramifications of wider deployment will ensure a vastly different landscape and not necessarily one that most people will benefit from. Make your decisions wisely because the literal fate of the world is largely in everyone's hands right now.

For complete disclosure, the arguments of OWF have seldom influenced my decision, and in these matters my opinions on the validity of the CB or otherwise will not be tendered by me. It seems fairly simple however to acknowledge there is a dispute, both sides have a version of events, both are probably plausible. Both sides will argue their validity in the matter and at the end of the day there is a still a war. What really matters for everyone is who rolls and where. Choose wisely.

An exceptionally exceptional post. My hat is off to you sir.

[junkahoolik]

Because then this whole mess would've been avoided. Instead they tried to start a clandestine operation against an alliance they weren't fighting on logic they were stuck in an eternal war when they had terms offered to them for a while.

things are never that simple since, really, every alliance has the chance to stop any war by simply disbanding and reforming under a different banner. but nobody does that since they have a reputation to keep.

[NoFish]

Because then this whole mess would've been avoided. Instead they tried to start a clandestine operation against an alliance they weren't fighting on logic they were stuck in an eternal war when they had terms offered to them for a while.

This.

I've felt from the strat this war was pretty clear-cut. TPF committed acts of war against Athens. TPF and Athens did not ever receive peace - ergo they are still at war. The DoW was really more of a formal acknowledgment of hostilities.

[eyriq]

First off I'd like to say I appreciate your response as being well thought out and presented as such.

However I'd still have to disagree with you there that this isn't about opinion. Since through your post we're not arguing through the validity of the CB, but rather the action that Athens did to respond to and through on the CB I'll focus on that.

Good point, it is a valid CB

While yes the specific ring that was part of the CB seemed to have been done with at the time of the declaration, that doesn't necessarily discount the fact that there was no danger involved from the party that initiated such an operation when Athens felt the both of them had never been in a conflict, thus they would've felt they were the ones being singled out for some underlying malicious intent aimed at Athens themselves, not just restrained to the war.

The rationale that TPF and Athens where not engaged in the Karma war is a stretch. They were on different fronts, but they were involved in the same war. The creation of the TPF "kitty bomb", (to steal from another thread an analogy that I liked), and the planting of it at Athens doorstep is admittedly an effective hostility towards Athens. However, it is an effective hostility conducted during a war, a war which has ended.

The evidence as accepted in the OP states that the "kitty bomb" went "native" before TPF was granted peace. TPF never informed Athens of the plan as developed or its current stage, so we have an effective hostility conducted during war, and now the omission of said hostility from the peace talks.

This is a valid complaint, but it does not justify immediate war. The TPF omission does not represent a threat immediate and necessary that would require Athens to choose between the flight or fight response.

As for other possible courses of actions, let's go down the other route that you wished Athens would have taken, that being diplomacy.

In the event that Athens had indeed gone to TPF in order to gain a diplomatic response for the actions that Athens feels was completely unjustified, where would that have led us? I believe from looking through the responses thus far from TPF and most of its own allies TPF would have told Athens that it was a non-issue and not submitted to any wrong doing as they have been doing thus far. In that event Athens, still feeling the acts in the CB against them were aimed at them personally which has been proven by all parties involved, would really have 2 options. Attack TPF or let them go.

Considering what I just mentioned Athens felt like about the CB, I'd wager to say they would not let them go and a war would have started much like the one they just declared on with the same evidence and arguments being upheld by both sides. Now what would be different in this scenario where they went the diplomatic route as opposed to the route they took which would've been inevitable in the other scenario? TPF would have had lots more time to hit peace mode and build up prior to a war, which only hurts Athens membership more in the long run.

Therefore from analyzing both scenarios I'd have to say Athens took the best option available to them for their membership based on all the information available to them and being able to quantify, rightly as proven so far by the arguments since the war kicked off, and took it.

I am not saying that they should have gone the diplomatic route. In fact, I see the move as bold and intelligent. What I am saying is that I do not see the logical trail to their course of action through the CB as described. There are pieces of the trail that are missing from the public view that would show, in my belief, that not only is the war justified, but it is cunning and bold the likes of which other rulers should admire. Just don't be surprised when the opposition calls a spade a spade.

[Paradigm]

Thanks for the content - the exact summary I was looking for

[WarriorConcept]

Good point, it is a valid CB

The rationale that TPF and Athens where not engaged in the Karma war is a stretch. They were on different fronts, but they were involved in the same war. The creation of the TPF "kitty bomb", (to steal from another thread an analogy that I liked), and the planting of it at Athens doorstep is admittedly an effective hostility towards Athens. However, it is an effective hostility conducted during a war, a war which has ended.

The evidence as accepted in the OP states that the "kitty bomb" went "native" before TPF was granted peace. TPF never informed Athens of the plan as developed or its current stage, so we have an effective hostility conducted during war, and now the omission of said hostility from the peace talks.

This is a valid complaint, but it does not justify immediate war. The TPF omission does not represent a threat immediate and necessary that would require Athens to choose between the flight or fight response.

I am not saying that they should have gone the diplomatic route. In fact, I see the move as bold and intelligent. What I am saying is that I do not see the logical trail to their course of action through the CB as described. There are pieces of the trail that are missing from the public view that would show, in my belief, that not only is the war justified, but it is cunning and bold the likes of which other rulers should admire. Just don't be surprised when the opposition calls a spade a spade.

Yes they were involved in the same global war, but at the same time those specific fronts were designed to keep wars concentrated instead of everyone fighting everyone else. With that in mind I know one of the biggest points of having such a large coalition was that whether each alliance could organize its own peace or not, and ultimately it was decided that each front would be fighting its own war and handling its own peace from what i remember on the Karma forums. Following with that TPF and Athens were not on the same front.

I am still puzzled as to what was wrong with an "immediate" war. Would you preferred they sat on the evidence for a few more weeks without accomplishing anything? Since you yourself just admitted that they should not have gone the diplomatic route, and very likely at the same time admitted defeat for those whom have given that argument, what other option is there? If you say there is some secret evidence that the rest of us aren't privy too I'd hope you'd care to share them but I believe the parameters of this thread and discussion is only confined to that which is public knowledge.

[zzzptm]

NV and TPF were on the same front in the Karma War.

TPF: did you send any spies into Nueva Vida?

[eyriq]

Right, what I'm saying is that within the parameters of this thread and what is commonly known the merit of this war is questionable; the war is unjustified. I don't have any more information, information that is needed to justify the action that Athens took. If things are taken at face value we would now have a premise of immediate war based on acts during a war as well as the omission of said acts from the peace process. As I think has been demonstrated elsewhere the implications of such a premise steer us towards the ridiculous. Instead, without the presence of an apparent and certain threat, and taking this CB in a vacuum, other less severe measures would present themselves as reasonable. Which leads me to believe that there are other issues/circumstances that led the CB to result in the actions Athens, Rok, GOD, and \m/. With names like Hoo and Xiph I trust that there is more to this situation than just the known facts.

[WarriorConcept]

Right, what I'm saying is that within the parameters of this thread and what is commonly known the merit of this war is questionable; the war is unjustified. I don't have any more information, information that is needed to justify the action that Athens took. If things are taken at face value we would now have a premise of immediate war based on acts during a war as well as the omission of said acts from the peace process. As I think has been demonstrated elsewhere the implications of such a premise steer us towards the ridiculous. Instead, without the presence of an apparent and certain threat, and taking this CB in a vacuum, other less severe measures would present themselves as reasonable. Which leads me to believe that there are other issues/circumstances that led the CB to result in the actions Athens, Rok, GOD, and \m/. With names like Hoo and Xiph I trust that there is more to this situation than just the known facts.

I could have sworn you just agreed the CB was valid but a minute ago. I don't see how the face value facts of this whole war are considered ridiculous in the slightest, especially when neither party have called the evidence into question as being false. I'm still waiting for your "other option" that you so ominously left on the table beside diplomacy, which we both discounted as being ineffective, and declaring, which we both agreed was the best strategy.

Also it's a known fact that GOD and \m/ were only included because TPF started hitting update 24 hours before Athens and RoK were ready to hit them so they needed whomever was active at the time. And throwing around names like Hoo and Xiph do little to help your credibility in this argument as I don't really get what you're reaching for by mentioning them.

[King Srqt]

With names like Hoo and Xiph I trust that there is more to this situation than just the known facts.

I lol'd, yes this was obviously a master plan by those puppet masters Hoo and Xiph!

[Scudlorium]

Great OP, TPF should have fessed up, they didn't, and thus we have this war.

Reminds me of a current real world affair...ah the IRONy in the Woods?

[eyriq]

I think it is valid as a cause for war, but that their actions based solely on that cause for war are unreasonable.

The other option, if we take the cause for war at face value, is to use diplomacy. I didn't mean to imply that there was a third option.

They did not choose diplomacy, which with the stated CB is the logical course of action here. I do not take those leaders for fools, and so I reason that there is more to the situation than meets the eye. I argue that there has to be more to this situation than meets the eye, or this operation is unjustified.

[Mongrel]

I should add OcUK sucessfully infiltrated, spied and wreaked havoc on Ragnarok during their extended war, and they're still around to talk about it.

They had plans to enact them and they were implemented - with success until August 2nd, those facts are indisputable.

Well I can dispute that, the plan was to infiltrate and undermine those alliances, so really it was a total failure. Having two weeks of working on their plan only to fall miles short of the goal is far from success.

[WarriorConcept]

I think it is valid as a cause for war, but that their actions based solely on that cause for war are unreasonable.

The other option, if we take the cause for war at face value, is to use diplomacy. I didn't mean to imply that there was a third option.

They did not choose diplomacy, which with the stated CB is the logical course of action here. I do not take those leaders for fools, and so I reason that there is more to the situation than meets the eye. I argue that there has to be more to this situation than meets the eye, or this operation is unjustified.

...what? You think it's a valid CB but it isn't?

And you already agreed that diplomacy was a pointless exercise like just last page.

Honestly...can you just admit you've lost this argument and all you have is unfounded paranoia on people you hardly know?

[tamerlane]

Warriorconcept, I explicitly asked in the OP that the legal status of war between Athens and TPF be left out. Lets be pragmatic here, they were on opposite sides of the fence and their war involved treaty partners of MDAP (C&G) There really isn't much else that can be said on that front unless you want to continue this war of semantics.

[Ardus]

I agree that there is a PR war to be fought, but I have conversed with several prominent members of alliances who would step in to defend those arrayed against TPF. All of them have acknowledged privately that the CB is noCB, but they don't want to let that fact get in the way of a good war.

And who are these individuals? I could just as easily state I've spoken with numerous members of alliances who would be obligated to defend TPF and found they believe the war to be just.

So MK et al can make thread after thread trying to justify it, but most of CN knows the CB doesn't stand up, CN also doesn't really care because they just want their war.

I wasn't aware anybody had released a study of the CN population regarding opinions on the quality of the casus belli. Again, you're using a weasel word with no hard facts or numbers.

So can we all just give these threads a rest now, agree the CB sucks, and war well hey who knows......

Let's not. Let's actually have a quality debate over the deepest aspects of this conflict and maybe learn something about each other instead of jumping to a conclusion without any reasoning. If you don't want to participate, you don't have to.

[Qaianna]

Warriorconcept, I explicitly asked in the OP that the legal status of war between Athens and TPF be left out. Lets be pragmatic here, they were on opposite sides of the fence and their war involved treaty partners of MDAP (C&G) There really isn't much else that can be said on that front unless you want to continue this war of semantics.

One major issue is that to some, THIS is an important link in whether or not the war is justified. Many people will focus on this as the lynchpin of their argument either for or against, or whatever else they see is the 'trump' card. This particular item is a popular one on both sides, by the way. It gets repeated ad nauseum as a form of 'shut up'.

[Hayzell]

Grub's post is by far the best opinion I've read regarding this event.

The only thing that I can add to this thread is that the intentional attempts at escalation of this conflict suggest to me that there are ulterior motives at play here, and that deep down many leaders on the side assailing TPF know the CB isn't completely solid.

I think the coming weeks will be some of the most interesting on planet Bob in quite some time...

[Fantastico]

Grub's post is by far the best opinion I've read regarding this event.

The only thing that I can add to this thread is that the intentional attempts at escalation of this conflict suggest to me that there are ulterior motives at play here, and that deep down many leaders on the side assailing TPF know the CB isn't completely solid.

I think the coming weeks will be some of the most interesting on planet Bob in quite some time...

The taunting for international escalation applies to both sides, and I think both are being eaten up with paranoia.

Sadly or happily, we never recognize it until hindsight comes along.

[Undabaningi Rasticus]

I am never sure whether you are deliberately revisionists or just plain ignorant of the facts, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume ignorance.

Additional Note: I find completely amusing the notion that a few people could actually "sabotage the community of Athens", as if the community that makes up the Athens alliances would be that fragile. I recall OcUK stating PUBLICLY that they had infiltrated Rok with the intent of of sabotaging the Rok community from the inside.

I can recall several public statements stating our infiltration of the RoK alliance, I don't recall any that specified a specific intent to sabotage the community from the inside. Perhaps you can find some and help my recollection.

The target of our insurgency was RoK government, I seem to recall the RoK community liking my insurgents so much that they elected some of them to government.

Our response? Sarcastically present the leader of OcUK (By then a 1-2 member "alliance") with a Recruiter medal, complete with a OWRP award ceremony.

I think you confuse sarcasm with irony here. My dear leader to this date stands in possession of a medal that clearly demonstrates the inability of RoK to secure their borders, an obvious and very public statement of an incompetent leadership.

As for 1-2 members, an alliance in an insurgent war is greater than the number of members flying the AA. We had 2 members of RoK .gov that I can openly admit to and others on the RoK AA with a different agenda. We also had members on away missions elsewhere. Those that remained to fly the OcUK AA were greater in number than 2.

Point being, there were many, many ways this whole affair could have been handled differently short of war. That war has come now speaks more about the mindset of Athens and Co. than it does about TPF.

Point being I probably agree with this point.

Edited December 31, 2009 by Undabaningi Rasticus